tv [untitled] May 21, 2011 5:30am-6:00am PDT
i thought both of these pieces of legislation were mutually exclusive, and i think i still believe that. but i have to say, i have been speaking over the last week with a number of companies and individuals that were not affected by supervisor mirkarimi's legislation who are -- that considering separately, to me, is a mistake. i hope that this is a point where i can ultimately support supervisor mirkarimi's and mind together, but i do not believe we should be considering the separately. i think supervisor mirkarimi is right. we have a problem. and that is we're the only city in california that has a tax for stock options, the only city that does this, and it does not only aspect these 10 companies. it aspects -- affects a large
cadre of companies. that is why i suggest my item the other week in committee was continued. i want to wait until the report comes out about that. i have no problems with that at all. i think that is the right approach. at the same time, i do not think we should take up one portion of this without considering this together. we need to have a comprehensive look at this issue. it is not limited to pre-public companies. it is a holistic thing that applies to all companies in san francisco. if we do not deal with this comprehensively, that is an affirmative statement on our part, on city hall's part, that we do not think we need to deal with as comprehensively and i think that is a mistake. maybe at the end of the day, one of our approaches is better, and i do not have opinion on that right now, but i think we should be continuing this together and
be considered together. i am happy -- as i understand president chiu wants to speak -- but i am going to make a motion to continue this for four weeks and consider these items together. supervisor chiu: colleagues, first of all, i want to think supervisor farrell and supervisor mirkarimi for their leadership in this area. to take a step back, the issue we are confronting is we have a payroll tax that is singular in its existence here in california, and a payroll tax that makes us the only exception in the entire country. this is why we need to move forward with supervisor kim's legislation and this is why i do think we need to move forward with supervisor mirkarimi's legislation today, which we
know deals with the situation confronting pre-ipo companies. that being said, i am open to working in the coming weeks and months to find out if there is a way for us to tackle the dilemma confronting other companies that otherwise might be making decisions to send employees outside san francisco. i happen to think the rights decision would be one that does not impact the general fund, that creates jobs, and is limited in time like supervisor kim's and supervisor mirkarimi's legislation so we can see how this impacts our tax policy and how it affects things in the future. that being said, i think we need to move forward with this right now. in part because not only do we have all lot of work in the budget committee on this item in front of us, but we have a solution that we know is going to work. it may take some time to figure out a solution for a larger,
more public companies. if it turns out we're able to find an elegant solution that could encompass the issues that are dealt with in the legislation we are considering today and will take care of those companies as well, i am open to revisiting that. at this moment, we have the bird in the hand and we should move forward. any further discussion, colleagues? supervisor farrell? supervisor farrell: i have a motion to continue this item for four weeks. supervisor chiu: is there a second? seconded by the supervisor of burned -- supervisor elsbernd . colleagues -- any discussion? >> this is one of those -- when i hear the bird in the hand
argument, there is no practical impact of delaying for four weeks to the negative here. all we are doing is allowing policy to be discussed in an open manner and allowing basic collegial respect to a colleague who has been working on this issue for months. you are not going to harm anything by delaying this for four weeks. we're going to be in the middle of a budget. we will deal with a variety of things in june and july anyway. i think we are more than capable of dealing with another 10 or 20 issues in june or july as we have been elected to do. i think we and the public would benefit from a comprehensive discussion. that is why i am seconding the motion. i think it is as simple continuance that we so often give to our colleagues who are working on issues, and i think we should respect that typical norm that happens here.
supervisor chiu: supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: the due diligence has been done on this legislation. it has been well vetted in a number of committee hearings and the small business commission. you have heard a number of arguments that they are mutually exclusive or not. they are night or day. this piece of law would focus on a dozen companies, at most. not even that many. the other law, that i think is being asked to be linked together -- we are talking about well over 200 companies. there is a significant difference in the impact of what that number looks like and the impact would be -- it is not well felled by the general fund. at least not well understood. we know what the impact of this legislation would be right now. we should use that information to move forward with the kind of
confidence that has been furnished by our controller, our key economic analyst. the mayor's office feels comfortable with that. to roll the dice on a larger piece of law right now which ex facto would have the law in it, i think it is a very large role of the dice. let's not be clumsy and let's then embraced the future legislation that will come before us at the same level of diligence that we have done with this. i ask that he reject the continuance. supervisor chiu: any further discussion, colleagues? on the motion to continue, roll call vote. [roll call vote]
advice of the mayor's office -- through at 24 on advice of the mayor's office. can you explain what we need to do that? >> if we could request that items 20, 21, 23, and 24 could be continued well we wait for a delegation from federal applied. supervisor chiu: a motion to rescind the vote, motioned -- motion to rescind the vote, seconded by supervisor kim. without objection, we will rescind the vote. we will continue this item until what date? june 14. motion by supervisor carmen chu -- it is in the middle of budget season. i assume these will be relatively simple items to resolve, right? >> yes, sir. supervisor chiu: motion by
supervisor carmen chu, seconded by supervisor mercury me -- supervisor mirkarimi. if we could now call the treasure island items 26 through 36. >> items 26 through 36 are the ordinance is that pertain to the treasure island/yerba buena project regarding ceqa guidelines and chapter 31, the adoption of a mitigation, monitoring, and recording program. items 27, or is amending the general plan with figures and various elements by adopting and adding the treasure island area plan. item 28, hornets amending the planning code to include the treasure island used district, amending section 1 of 5 relating to height and bulk limits.
item 29 -- ordinance and in the zoning map to show the zoning designations of treasure island. item 30 is an ordinance amending the subdivision code, i -- adding division four, pertaining to the subdivision process pertaining to a process for reviewing a filing vesting transfer maps. item 31 -- resolution approving the transportation implementation plan. item 32 is an ordinance approving the treasure island community development for certain real property located within treasure island, accenting certain parts of administrative code chapter 6 and adopting findings. item 33 is concerning the disposition and development agreement and interagency cooperation agreement and various findings. item 34, resolution approving
the am -- economic development conveyance memorandum for the former naval station treasure island from the united states government to the treasure island development authority. item 35, resolution approving the amended and restated base closure almost assistance agreement and adopting various findings. and item 36 -- resolution approving the public trust exchange agreement between the treasure island development authority and the california state laws. supervisor chiu: supervisor kim? supervisor kim: my apologies. i would like to continue in 26 through 36 so we can hear it as the same time as the appeal of the ceqa. however, i would like clarification on item 33 from the city attorney. i believe we may need to defer that to the land use committee.
>> supervisor ken, that is correct. we recommend item 32 b referred back to the land-use commission. supervisor kim: thank you. i would like to amend my motion and re-refer item 32 to the land use committee. supervisor chiu: colleagues, supervisor kim wants to re-refer item 32 back to land use. is there a second? seconded by supervisor mirkarimi. any discussion? those items shall be handed -- handled as discussed. item 37? >> item 37, ordinance amending the planning code to require any business selling prescription drugs to the public to post display materials explaining how to safely and lawfully dispose of unused prescription drugs.
supervisor chiu: colleagues, this is item 37. any discussion? supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, mr. president. first of all, i would like to think the department of the environment and the mayor's office for their help with this particular legislation. if you will recall, we were trying to advance legislation that had never been advanced before in san francisco, and that is to create a repository for people to take back their discarded medications, other unwanted pharmaceuticals. we gleaned from other legislatures who asked that pharmaceutical companies help shoulder the burden of the cost, so their citizens would be able to use these repositories so hazardous waste would be properly disposed of. the law was never implemented.
nowhere in the united states are there laws at the state level. so, county by county, these laws are beginning to crop up at the county's expense. san mateo county actually practices the infrastructure that allows their citizens to be able to dispose of their unwanted medications and pharmaceuticals at san mateo county's expense. we want the pharmaceutical industry to shoulder the cost of the burden here. we have dealt with the two pharmaceutical consortiums for a program that will begin in the next several months, 2011. in order to direct people to know where they can discard their pharmaceuticals, this ordinance, which got the support of the small business commission as well, has directed people in pharmacies like walgreen's, safeway, others, where they can
go. that is the criteria from other legislation like the mercury warnings. i would appreciate your support. hopefully, state law will catch up with local law and we will be able to do something about what i think has become an increasing threat to our waste water system because of contaminants leaching into that, about people getting access to medications, pharmaceuticals that should not, especially our young people, because cdc had shown where fatalities and harm has been well caused by unregulated access during your support is appreciated. supervisor chiu: any additional discussion? roll call vote, please. >> [roll call vote]
there are ten ayes. supervisor chiu: item 38. >> item 38, and ending the governmental conduct code to allow a former appointed mayor to obtain full time city employment within one year after leaving office. supervisor chiu: without objection, this ordinance is passed on first reading. item 39. >> in 39 is on motion confirming the appointment of joel ramos. supervisor chiu: supervisor wiener. supervisor weiner: i am speaking in favor of the nomination. i want to commend mayor lee for
making this nomination to the mta board. in g-8 make such a difference to the lives of citizens to take muni, and mr. ramosmr. ramos hal the experience to run the transportation agency, and he knows of people rely on these systems. being able to think outside the box and how we solve these problems, the transportation problems that we face in san francisco. i enthusiastically support him. supervisor kim: i want to concur with supervisor weiner. he is one of the strongest applicants i have seen for any nomination that we have brought forward as a commissioner on this board.
with transit, he is very great and i know he will be a tremendous advocate for the city and the transit riders. it is great to have a director -- that is not on a vehicle, that uses this to see his friends and go so impressed by his work and his experience in advocacy, and his knowledge. i am very excited to work with them as the director. supervisor cohen: following my former colleagues, i also want to say that not only is the outstanding for the reasons, he is a father and knows the
parent's perspective. the other thing is the as multi- lingual, and i support the nomination of ramos. supervisor chiuu: i want to talk about how i look forward to mr. ramos and what he is looking at with transportation and a different challenges that the neighborhoods may have. this is the multiple demands that there may be, among other things. i look forward to this conversation. supervisor mar: so many others are speaking on this, and he is an expert on the transit system.
i am looking at this and i think that he could be very valuable. he is great as a community organizer. as he mentioned, there is a tremendous intersection of housing and transportation planning. i support the nomination as well. >> can we take this item? without objection. next item? >> item 40 is confirming the appointment of doreen woo ho to the ports commission. >> any discussion? >> supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: i wanted to
thank mayor lee for appointing doreen woo ho. i am proud to support her. she has a strong background in finances. this is something that we need as we begin to engage in the america's cup and a lot of the financial rewards, with many of these facilities. i am also happy that we are supporting a commissioner and four of the five members will be women. i know that across the state we have a lot of men working in the ports. this is led by women and the experts in their fields. i have to do this before you.
>> i have the opportunity to sit down and meet with her, and talk about her commitment to the city and county of san francisco. she talked about the nomination of the two women, and the men in the county of san francisco. having somebody on the position -- on the port commission. >> i will concur on this statement. without objection, this is approved. we now go to the 3:00 special orders. can you call item 41 through 43. >> comprised of special orders, the board of supervisors, for item 41, a public hearing on the
ground lease on the side of arelious at gilmann and 5800. the redevelopment agency to sell land on the east side of arelious, by the alice griffin public housing site. >> supervisor cohen, as the supervisor, do you have comments? supervisor cohen: this is similar to what we have heard in the recent weeks. this authorizes the different agencies, and the adopted plan. this would lead to the purchase and sale agreement, that would
help one of the most distressed public-housing sites. the revitalization is a key component to the shipyard project. this was approved by the city last year. this provides for a replacement of the existing public housing units within the mixed income community. this will also be put together in such a way that this will make certain that no resident will be moved off site and they will be able to move to a new replacement unit. i will ask the redevelopment agency to offer a brief summary of this proposal. >> we have a representative from redevelopment.
>> good afternoon. i am the deputy executive director. i am very pleased to be here. this is a for the alice griffith rebuild. one of the discussions with moving forward, this has been the need to rebuild. we have this opportunity for the grant, and the application, this is for $30 million. the steps that we are asking for to take today are the implementing steps that will give control to the developer making the application. we're one of the six applicants.
not only will we have money for the rebuild, and service money and this is much more comprehensive than bricks and mortar. and we embrace the opportunity to make this happen. in accordance with the community redevelopment law, we must approve of what is required. and there is the parking lot that is adjacent to this, we will be selling that parcel to salazar, solely for the purpose of the neighborhood application. if this application should not be successful, -- this item, we
are requesting that this item be put on the table. what we have heard is that we have the opportunity of getting the project, to get the opportunity to those who would choose -- seniors would voluntarily choose to move here, and this is anticipated to be a senior rental development, sponsored by mccormick and salazar. we have found, practically days ago, that they will not be providing those project-based sections, and we will modify the application, for the parcel at this time, but we will intend to come back to this in the future.
to have that property, for the senior center. this is for the purposes of not only building affordable senior housing, but a new senior center that will spill -- that will serve the entire bay view. members of the team are here and ready to answer any questions you may have about this particular disposition or the neighborhood application. >> thank you very much for your brief presentation. i actually will move to approve item number 42, tabling item number 43. we moved to approve this. >> we have to take public comment first. let me see if there are any members of the public who wish to speak on items 41 through 43. can